NationStates Jolt Archive

I think we should. =0

Its too hard to collect 137 signatures. Maybe we should lower it to at least a 100? Many , many great resolutions get thrown away. :headbang: Like the Animal Protection Act, for example.

I plead ignorance.

I honestly have no idea what in hell you are talking about. Call me dumb.

Would it be better if we lower the required number of signatures needed to put a resolution into a vote? There.

In any case, it's not going to happen - it's a game mechanics issue first and foremost. As to the philosophical issue, I don't see any real difficulty in getting proposals to the floor for voting. Consider a telegram campaign to get approvals for proposals.

I don't agree. The number is not fixed, but is based on the total number of delegates. To reach that number of endorsements, you need publicity - TG campaigns, forum discussions, etc. It also acts as a good foil to most of the dodgy proposals - if something gets the right number of approvals, there's a good chance that it will be legal.

[edit] Written before I saw Krioval's post. Trying to write one-handed slows me down.

6 percent is fine with me.

but it should be 6 percent out of total active delegates

delegates who havent been active for 250 days , hell, even 25 days, is not likely going to do anything , let alone approve a proposal.

But my government has complained enough and it is now back to campaigning.

Madonna,
U.N ambassador

6 percent is fine with me.

but it should be 6 percent out of total active delegates

delegates who havent been active for 250 days , hell, even 25 days, is not likely going to do anything , let alone approve a proposal.

But my government has complained enough and it is now back to campaigning.

Madonna,
U.N ambassador
No nation could possibly last 250 days without any activity. Nations get deleted after 28 days of not logging in, or 60 days if in vacation mode.

6 percent is fine with me.

but it should be 6 percent out of total active delegates

delegates who havent been active for 250 days , hell, even 25 days, is not likely going to do anything , let alone approve a proposal.
Two hundred fifty days no nation can be inactive that long when after 28 days their deleted, even on vacation mode a nation is deleted after 60 days, so there is no way a delegate could be inactive for 250 days. Unless you're refering to delegates who haven't approved a proposal, in which case is could simply be that the delegate didn't like the proposal. And then there are the nations who are UN members simply to invade other regions in which case, in all likelyhood, they don't even read the proposal list.

Two hundred fifty days no nation can be inactive that long when after 28 days their deleted, even on vacation mode a nation is deleted after 60 days, so there is no way a delegate could be inactive for 250 days. Unless you're refering to delegates who haven't approved a proposal, in which case is could simply be that the delegate didn't like the proposal. And then there are the nations who are UN members simply to invade other regions in which case, in all likelyhood, they don't even read the proposal list.


Oops sorry, Maybe I've read it wrong than.

I think we should. =0

Its too hard to collect 137 signatures. Maybe we should lower it to at least a 100? Many , many great resolutions get thrown away. :headbang: Like the Animal Protection Act, for example.

It is amazingly difficult to get 6% of the Delegates to endorse a proposal in the 3-4 days that it is in the proposal queue.

However, as has been suggested by Enn and Flibbleites, there are ways to collect the UN Delegate endorsements.

1) Start a telegram campaign ... be polite in your telegrams, if somebody yells at you, then just toss them in your telegram ignore box -- they are a lost cause and nothing you can say will get them to stop yelling at you. You should naturally include the exact title of your proposal in your letter.

2) Watch your proposal as it sits in the queue and make a list of who endorses your proposal, so that if you need to resubmit your proposal (which usually happens) you will know whom is likely to support it the second time. :)

Trying again and again, is vital to a resolution. There have been very few resolutions to my knowledge that have made it to the UN floor without smart telegram campaigns.

Trying again and again, is vital to a resolution. There have been very few resolutions to my knowledge that have made it to the UN floor without smart telegram campaigns.
And even with them it can take a while. I believe I still hold the record for the most number of submissions, 15 for Habeas Corpus. Hopefully it won't take that long for you, ADP.

Its too hard to collect 137 signatures. Maybe we should lower it to at least a 100? Many , many great resolutions get thrown away. :headbang: Like the Animal Protection Act, for example.
Heh, just be glad it isn't May or early June, when the NS population peaks. For National Systems of Tax I had to get more like 150 delegate approvals than 137, icky. Late August, I believe, is about as low as the delegate count will get because many kids will begin school by September and start playing the game (again?) increasing numbers in the UN and the number of delegates.

Heh, just be glad it isn't May or early June, when the NS population peaks. For National Systems of Tax I had to get more like 150 delegate approvals than 137, icky. Late August, I believe, is about as low as the delegate count will get because many kids will begin school by September and start playing the game (again?) increasing numbers in the UN and the number of delegates.
::grumbles about northern hemisphere-people::

I don't have a problem with the approval system as it is now. A couple of thoughts, though....

Lowering the approval number to 100 would make it just a tad easier to keep track of how many approvals are still needed. (OK, OK.... I admit to being terminally lazy!)

One thing I think might be valuable in obtaining approvals -- besides the methods already suggested -- is making sure you put the proposal up in draft and respond thoughtfully to comments received. In the case of the "Freedom of Conscience" proposal, the discussion of the draft eliminated two of my concerns and got me interested in the proposal. When it came up for approval, I went out and bludgeoned... er... persuaded two delegates to add approvals. Not much, but every little bit helps.

It's been brought up before, and it's unlikely to change from the current state.

Have a look at the history of the UN resolutions:

http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/UN_Timeline

You'll notice that the number of proposals that reached the floor (whether accepted, rejected, or removed for rulebreaking before or after voting) has remained constant at approximately 14-15 per quarter since the third month of the game. I've seen them hit queue with a surprise 6% at the last minute, and I've seen 'em collect 12% to 15% before the full submission period was complete. Some of them have waited in line for several cycles and accumulated upwards of 20% of delegate votes. No matter how you count it, that's a lot of approvals.

To my statistically-minded eye, that says that we are just about perfect in terms of the acceptance range. If people don't like what's in the proposal queue, we don't get to vote for crappy proposals. If delegates like what they see, we sometimes have 3 or 4 in a row coming to vote. It works.

If you add up the votecounts from the General Assembly, you'll notice that most passed resolutions in the fairly recent past have gotten about 15,000 to 20,000 total votes. In that same period, the overall UN population has been around 30,000 to 40,000. Call it 50% response, and that's not counting the fact that Delegates get duplicate votes for their regionmates. The actual voter response is probably closer to 30%. Not what I'd call a really responsive electorate, but it's still law when it's passed by the ones that show up. That's how democratic voting assemblies work.

It ain't broke, so we don't need to fix it.

Would it be appropriate for me to add a link to my pdf of the index of UN resolutions along with their votes in the NSWiki UN_Timeline?

http://pweb.netcom.com/~mierzwa10k/una/Ressummary.pdf

Though I'm a bit behind in the summary, I've *also* been updating the NSWiki UN entries. The advantage is my pdf includes the percentage in support, which is a pretty frequently asked UN question.

I've seen them hit queue with a surprise 6% at the last minute,
Mine was one of those, it recieved the 147 approvals it needed during the update that would have deleted it, believe me, you don't get much more last minute than that.